This church has some mega bucks coming in.  When you look at the building, property, and small number of members, you have to wonder how this little congregation can be talking about these kinds of numbers. 

Where are the other board members of this 501c3.  I didn’t think this kinda stuff was even possible.

Legal action?  Absolutely!

I thought it was interesting that the congregation was ready to begin looking for a new pastor even though Holloway is still preaching.  What’s going to happen?  Are they going to have dueling preachers?

Are they still paying this guy? Or does he write and sign his own salary checks?

Very sad.  You say the church leadership is to blame, but I wonder what their leadership consists of?  Do they have bylaws that expressly state how decisions are to be made?  Do the elders or deacons have any kind of authority over the pastor?  If not, their hands may be tied.  But I bet they’ve learned a lot of lessons from this experience and the next pastor will have a hard way to go in terms of even “thinking” about doing anything without the congregation’s involvement.

Actually, Dave, what the Bible says is that believers are to do everything possible to settle and judge matters themselves, rather than to be judged by unbelievers.  But, Matthew 18, the Bible also says that if a professing believer refuses to accept the correction and judgment of the Body, then they are to be separated and “treated as an unbeliever.”

Therefore, in this situation I believe it is entirely biblical that if this body of believers has followed the ‘steps’ of Matthew 18 (which it appears they have) and the pastor continues to reject that authority (as he apparently has), then they are to treat him as an unbeliever - that is, necessarily settle the matter in the secular courts as a secular, legal matter.  Then, of course, there are the Scriptures (Romans 13 anyone) that command us to be obedient and submissive to the laws of the state that do not violate those of God.  Not knowing the wording of this church’s constitution and by-laws, this certainly looks like at least a reasonable question of embezzlement.  As such, is there not even an obligation for the church to take this seriously and report to the state as required?

OK, I’ve opened the can of worms . . .

Dave,

I appreciate your reply and perspective.  I am aware of, and of course believe in the truth of 1 Corinthians 6:7, but the whole context of Scripture that addresses these matters must be considered not just a single verse without context.

In regards to the mocking concern, I’m totally with you in this being a legitimate, serious and frustrating concern.  Yet, I would still propose the question of which is more deserving or likely for the world to mock the church and our Savior:  (1) that a church is taking seriously the legitimate sin, offense and possibly illegal activity of it’s pastor - even at the risk of its own embarrassment; or (2) keeping all of these things ‘close to the vest’ and ‘hidden’ - even at the risk of allowing a pastor to grossly sin and violate his office without appropriate discipline?

I think the public’s response to the recent scandals in the Catholic Church with most of the outrage targeting at the Church’s alleged cover-up, hiding and refusing to report answers this question.

Dude!  $3,120 a WEEK?  That’s some salary!